Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Boudica

  1. I think that the question of whether to go on with the league is already pointless because today the last officially scheduled games should have taken place. I suggest we just evaluate the results and perhaps a new league can start soon? According to the schedule, our team, Centurions, should have played two games on Sunday 28 July. One against Los Gringos and the other against eae em. I hereby present a lobby screenshot showing that neither Los Gringos or eae em were present on time with at least two members as required. Our team was present with at least Wendy and me. For this reas
  2. The ability to add some more info to your username might be a good alternative to creating a new username. Maybe if this is possible to do using a mod, it might be good enough.
  3. I understand that you see the victory in the attached replay as a matter of luck, @JC (naval supremacist), and I see that as a sign of your weak understanding of what happened in the game. An experienced player can guess the probable outcome based on the initial state of that game. Don't worry, the problem isn't with me not understanding what you mean by "luck can happen". I actually made my conclusion based on that statement. Perhaps it was you who didn't understand that we aren't using just the binary end result of the team game to compare 1-vs.-1 skills, but rather how the players did withi
  4. To be fair, you effectively got roughly three times as much thanks to the Iberian bonus (my fast approximation), and PhyZik only received the resources late, when it barely made a difference. The civs were clearly imbalanced and you seem to also have gotten extra berries. I mean, Persia can be a good civ in team games when you have or are able to buy extra the time to develop. No one considers it to be any match in a situation like this. Not sure if it's worth reacting to @JC (naval supremacist)'s comment, but I feel I should. It's funny how he misses the point entirely, and only uses you
  5. I initially also only gave the basic information, but then when I log in, I'm presented with this unskippable screen asking to tell them more about myself. Well, and I don't want the information to be used for credits, so this doesn't make me want to fill it in either. Perhaps @GunChleoc knows a secret way to get around that screen. I understand that it's at least possible to clear the information later as @Nescio did. Thanks for the info.
  6. I once wanted to fix a few translations, but I didn't like how much personal info Transifex asks, to the point it discouraged me from creating an account. Why can't you just pick a username to suggest translation changes?
  7. One problem with waterfalls is this gaming industry obligation that there needs to be a secret area behind every waterfall.
  8. That was a nice show, I really enjoyed replaying. I liked @PhyZik's confusion maneuver when he picked Spartans instead of a cavalry civ, because he's mostly been playing those recently. The team also did a good cooperation at getting water control and later while attacking. On the eastern front, nani really showed what it means to be a troll master. You had the patience and no fear of waiting for the right moment. On the other front, JC probably tried to replicate my Kush strategy from today, but he failed hard. Marc knew how to best defend a raid, that is by counter attacking.
  9. I'm afraid that you can't officially demand the points if the match settings weren't set right. You could probably ask the opponent to admit the defeat and give you the points by instantly resigning a new game. Anyway, I'd instead recommend moving on because, knowing how the rating works, it's not bad as it sounds. The thing to keep in mind is that If you improve at the game, it won't be difficult for you to get to a higher rating fast in the future. Higher rated player don't deny you the points as often as noobs. And by beating a higher rated player you can even get significantly more po
  10. Hi Poppapoptart, my guess regarding the missing victory notification is incorrect match settings. It could be the victory condition set to None, which makes the game go on forever without a winner. Or maybe if you selected a special map or maybe a map with multiple player slots. I'd have to see the replay to tell more.
  11. You know what, @eae? If you don't have anything reasonable to bring to the discussion, you better just stop contributing. You are quoting what I said in response to you but not include the original point I was responding to. So am I supposed to go find it myself in order to understand your short answers? I'm not going to do the extra work for you when you don't even feel like going through what had been said by others. The key point remains that you are talking about some assumptions people supposedly made. I asked you who made those assumptions according to your observations. What is the
  12. If the rams were much easier to destroy, as they used to be, the game would reward an expansive and defensive strategy too much. Consider that rams are one of the pricier unit types. Still, just like 10 swordsmen destroy a ram in seconds. How does that seem too much? That's quite a lot of unit types that you call OP. Have you realized that if everything is OP, nothing is? Your list still is far from complete though. What if I told you that your "invincible" 200 slinger army could be wiped out by a significantly smaller balanced Spartan army? Or let's take half the amount of roman
  13. You've just made an explicit assumption. I think it's been already mentioned that the purpose of the rating is to put players in a relative order by their averaged performance over many games and different conditions. These assumptions are correct if you use this definition. Who made this assumption? Also, I'll bet you $1000 that the weakest team won't win a single game against the top rated teams. I'm not saying that my prediction was easy to make but still. Thanks, but this has already been addressed too. Have you read the thread, or are you just trying to argue with
  14. Sorry, @Stockfish, I don't understand what you you're saying. Who can't be saying what seriously? What message? In reaction to @borg-, the purpose of this is mostly to ensure that the games are fun. If we "don't take this seriously", I could as well "have fun" winning battles with an inferior army by dodging all the projectiles. I don't really see any good reason in belittling my fight for a fair game. Especially if this only came as a reaction to someone promoting unfair tactics. And @Dakara, your suggestion sure is good. The main problem I see is that it's written in French. O
  15. I think we could see that people already started to use tactics while forming the teams instead of focusing on helping fine-tune the rules. Maybe that fine-tuning phase should have been explicitly separated.
  16. I don't want to take any credit from @MarcusAureliu#s for his work with organizing the event. There was more to do than make teams. It was a bit unfortunate that I only joined the discussion later. Anyway, I believe that it wasn't already too late. The tier system wasn't yet finalized, so I thought that the suggested teams would have to be subject to further discussion (rather than letting someone grab the best teammates based on one person's opinion about player abilities). I felt that my suggestions were ignored when the first round was announced, but provided it was only intended as a
  17. Based on the games I saw yesterday, I'd need to increase my rating of @Issh. I considered that initially and only decided not to because he likes to embrace nubness, but I doubt he will do that in the tournament. Just for the record, yesterday he could get double the pop of a player rated almost two points higher. Now that the point difference among teams is increasing, it might be a good time to ask the lower ranked teams if they are OK to play like that. I think that @go2die has now put quite a lot of time into it. It might have little purpose if we do nothing with the data we got out o
  18. Do you mean you won't engage any further provided you get the last word? Because your "reasonable opinion" might not be recognized as such by others. What exactly is "quality of life" in this context? I guess my life could be of a higher quality if I could just win every game without any skills. Anyway, even this final opinion of yours wasn't what we were starting with. At first it was like "any mod should be allowed because they are available to anyone", etc. I don't want to extend on this particular topic here either. I mostly only gave it as an example of how you take your opinion as t
  19. Thanks for pointing that out. I realized I was doing that, but I was a bit tired from the lengthy discussion of yesterday, where even solid arguments didn't seem to help. That's why I decided not go my usual way anymore. Another reason is that there isn't really too much space for objective arguments in this case. The game will be a competition of skills in either way, we just have the right to decide what kind of skills it should test. I think that most people consider it to be unwanted when a key skill of the whole set is dancing, rather than team cooperation, picking good battles etc.
  20. Wait, did that guy just dance off a melee attack? What a hacker!
  21. Not a surprise that this is coming from someone who tried to advocate the use of cheating mods because "everyone can do it". Allowing dancing is such a bad idea that I'd almost agree to make it happen just to show how bad of an idea it is. There is a clear distinction between retreat dancing and spam clicking a unit in front of your army. Also I don't think it's fair to say that ValihrAnt might have problems with this rule. He knows better than that.
  22. Twenty years ago, a lot of games would use MIDI tracks for the background music to save disk space. I even had a MIDI track editor back then and I used to make music myself. The old soundtracks have a nostalgic feel to me for that reason. Tzar was a game similar to the original AoE, but it didn't get nearly as much publicity, probably because it came from Bulgaria. To list one more, I'll add the obvious: the original soundtrack from The Rise of Rome. I only had a demo of that game when I was small.
  23. I think that @Dakara did an unexpectedly good rating job. If his rating is not copyrighted, I'd just say copy it and count it as mine. I first considered changing the rating of two or three players, but I realized that it's the stability of their play that matters. Some can grow really fast but won't fight great, some perform worse when rushed or with a less played civilizations, some play great but have little sense of the team, and others the opposite. I think that for example esu might become better pretty soon. He was a good teammate IIRC, only lacking some specific skills.
  24. I really hoped that there would be some more strategy talk before the league starts. There have been a few more players that wanted to join and we could get more fun out of it if we made more and better teams first.
  25. I've just tried playing a game of Civilization VI and I've never been so bored.
  • Create New...